@frostion Might be better to consider making AA more expensive but stronger so that they aren't so 'hitpoint' efficient otherwise they become 'fodder' instead of the infantry units. Something like 3 AA attack/defense and cost maybe 12 PUs. More aligned with Tank Destroyers.

@frostion I'd say red. Makes sense that Corsica to S.Sardinia is a longer way to go.
This also reminds me that, at this scope, I would definitely consider adding the Elbe island (representing all the Tuscan Archipelago), but only if you add Cefalonia too.

@frostion Good catch. There was a bug (probably been around forever) that caused the TripleA icon not to appear and for scramble window to not close if you exited the game. Both are fixed in the PR now.
Yeah, no plan to remove that property as it would break lots of maps and A&A die hards would be up in arms :) I would say there are probably better ways to prevent new carriers from being taken out too easily. I would recommend some combination of these properties instead as they are more intuitive:
<property name="Produce fighters on carriers" value="true" editable="false">
<boolean/>
</property>
<property name="Produce new fighters on old carriers" value="true" editable="false">
<boolean/>
</property>
<property name="Land existing fighters on new carriers" value="true" editable="false">
<boolean/>
</property>

@General_Zod Yes, the design is not final yet once everything works we can easily reconsider how stuff needs to be layed out.
Fullscreen won't be permanent either, once the UI is working I'll introduce an option to choose default window sizes.
The details in the background need to be discussed with @Hepps though ^^

And nearly perfect first try.
Couple of name placements off.
Other than that it's pretty much 100%. The border colouration can wait till a few people have put eye's on it and we have a consensus.
Oh... and I added the Gladious as the cursor icon. =)

@alkexr Yeah, while it would be possible to eventually have the AI understand units being good against other specific units we are pretty far off from that. Though for example the AI actually determines support attachment value by looking at the ratio of nearby supportable and supporting units. For example, if the AI has lots of infantry but 0 artillery then it'll give full value to the artillery support attachment where as if it has 0 infantry but lots of artillery then it'll give almost 0 value to the artillery support attachment.
I think the simplest solution is just having an AI option that only looks at TUV, air/land/sea, and movement then assumes attack/defense, support, and AA options are balanced for the unit set.

Looks like your connection to TripleA Forum was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.